This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: [PATCH 2/6] linux: Assume clock_getres CLOCK_{PROCESS,THREAD}_CPUTIME_ID

From: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>
To: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval dot zanella at linaro dot org>
Cc: libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2019 12:43:28 +0100
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] linux: Assume clock_getres CLOCK_{PROCESS,THREAD}_CPUTIME_ID
References: <20190208183910.30799-1-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> <20190208183910.30799-2-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> <87ef8hi70m.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> <98bcebda-b411-7a54-3969-b096f0599991@linaro.org>

* Adhemerval Zanella:

> nscd uses _SC_MONOTONIC_CLOCK and if I understood correctly both IA64 
> manual and kernel code, the CLOCK_MONOTONIC implementation on SMP IA64
> system with ITC that may drift is a best effort...

Are you sure about that?  Wouldn't that be a bug in kernel
clock_gettime, and not something we should paper over in userspace?

Thanks,
Florian

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH 2/6] linux: Assume clock_getres CLOCK_{PROCESS,THREAD}_CPUTIME_ID
  - From: Adhemerval Zanella

References:
- [PATCH 1/6] nptl: Remove pthread_clock_gettime pthread_clock_settime
  - From: Adhemerval Zanella
- [PATCH 2/6] linux: Assume clock_getres CLOCK_{PROCESS,THREAD}_CPUTIME_ID
  - From: Adhemerval Zanella
- Re: [PATCH 2/6] linux: Assume clock_getres CLOCK_{PROCESS,THREAD}_CPUTIME_ID
  - From: Florian Weimer
- Re: [PATCH 2/6] linux: Assume clock_getres CLOCK_{PROCESS,THREAD}_CPUTIME_ID
  - From: Adhemerval Zanella

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]